UBL Order profile mismatch: Order only versus Ordering

What these identifiers choose

UBL supplies a document vocabulary and XSD structure. A purchasing process adds requirements beyond that structure. In an Order, ProfileID identifies the selected business process, while CustomizationID identifies the order transaction specification. A document can satisfy a schema and still choose identifiers that do not agree with the recipient’s expected process. Matching these two fields does not run the rest of the BIS rules.

The current primary documentation identifies Order only 3.3 and Ordering 3.3 as separate processes. Our selector compares the exact process identifier for the option you deliberately choose. The transaction identifier for Order is urn:fdc:peppol.eu:poacc:trns:order:3. Order only uses urn:fdc:peppol.eu:poacc:bis:order_only:3; Ordering uses urn:fdc:peppol.eu:poacc:bis:ordering:3. These are technical identifier values, not a copied set of official business-rule assertions.

Use the process agreed with the receiver

The fictional error changes the transaction identifier to an unknown value. ORDER-CUSTOMIZATION-ID points to line 4. Correct that value only when the sender and recipient actually intend the Order transaction under the selected process. Replacing an identifier merely to silence a validator can hide a mismatch between ERP configuration and the purchasing workflow. Ordering can involve responses; this tool validates Order documents and does not claim to validate the entire exchange or an OrderResponse.

A generic UBL selection leaves profile agreement unverified when identifiers are present. A custom or unknown selected profile always receives a review warning and never a complete green approval. Newer BIS documentation or a different UBL revision must be assessed independently. A namespace alone does not prove the UBL release because the major-version namespace is shared; the scope here remains explicitly pinned to UBL 2.1, and a conflicting UBLVersionID is reported.

Trace the identifier back to configuration

1. Ask which purchasing process the receiving integration actually expects, then compare that setting with the selected Order only or Ordering option.
2. Locate the reported CustomizationID or ProfileID element using the line number in the downloaded diagnostic.
3. Update the ERP mapping or trading-partner configuration and export a fresh fictional test order.
4. Keep the XSD result distinct from this identifier comparison; the transaction profile imposes further constraints that this preflight does not implement.

Do not select another process merely because its identifier happens to match the current document. If your organisation uses a bespoke agreement, keep the custom option and read the warning as a boundary of this tool’s knowledge. The result cannot establish that the receiving organisation is registered for a particular transaction.

Where the process values come from

The identifier tables in Order only 3.3 and Ordering 3.3 provide the process and transaction values used in this comparison. Their publication versions were inspected on 6 November 2026. Identifier strings are used as factual configuration values; the implementation supplies its own diagnostics.

The OASIS UBL 2.1 standard provides the shared Order vocabulary and explains its schema architecture. The Order root schema leads to common-component imports. An identifier comparison does not replace validation against that complete structural contract.

Understand the rights and execution boundary

This feature does not redistribute the official BIS document or an official Schematron package. The documented restriction on repackaging the BIS publication is not treated as proof about every individual repository file. Root repository access likewise supplies no blanket rule license. Artifact-specific rights must be evidenced before an official package can be incorporated.

UBL’s original OASIS and UN/CEFACT copying notices were recorded, but the complete chain also reaches separately originating signature schemas. Redistribution rights for the ETSI imports have not been established here. Consequently the published tool includes no official schema chain. Users with concrete rights may supply their complete original package locally, together with provenance and notices for every file. Hashes identify the submitted bytes; a hash does not confer permission.

The optional assertion adapter executes a narrow self-contained XPath 1.0 subset in the browser. A package requiring XPath 2, external includes, variables or phase handling is rejected in its entirety and labelled unexecuted. A compatible official engine would be a separate implementation and rights decision. Neither a passing identifier comparison nor a user-supplied schema proves complete BIS conformance, access-point certification or successful network delivery.